Budget Tied To Future Of Slots

Senate Passes Its Own Version

Budget Is Tied To Future Of Slots

The state budget has become intertwined with the legalization of slot machines as a political issue, plunging the legislature into disarray that recalls the chaotic 1991 session.

Saturday's events had all the earmarks of a day last June, when the income-tax issue drove a wedge between the House and Senate.

As a blazing sun streamed through the Capitol's stained glass windows, warming the chambers and caucus rooms to summer temperatures, Democratic senators decided to reject a 1992-93 budget bill passed by the House.

Many hours later, about 1 this morning, the Senate voted 19-16 to adopt its own version and ship the budget back to the House, where it faces almost certain defeat.

This time there is no income tax to fight over -- it's the law -- but the Senate has a new issue: state aid to municipalities.

The Democratic Senate majority wants about $38 million more to be distributed to local governments than was included in the House budget.

As it happens, on the House calendar is a bill that would legalize slot machines and send an estimated $45 million to cities and towns.

"The budget is being held hostage to the slots," said Deputy House Majority Leader Jonathan W. Pelto, D-Mansfield.

Senate Majority Leader Cornelius P. O'Leary, D-Windsor Locks, said the issue is not slot machines, but money for municipalities. He also said that's only one issue dividing the House and Senate.

Sen. Joseph H. Harper Jr., D-New Britain, co-chairman of the appropriations committee, said there are other issues, but not many -- and not enough, in his view, to justify the Senate's confrontational action.

"I support sending [the House] budget to the governor," said Harper, adding that disputes about portions of it can be worked out in other bills.

A number of other senators said they agreed with Harper's suggestion, and sources said a majority of the 19 Democrats in a

closed caucus favored that approach.

Regardless, the eventual decision was to amend the House bill with a Senate version of the budget. The Democrats' dissension was not evident on the floor, as the vote followed party lines. All Republicans voted no.

The Senate's action forces the House to reconsider the budget, probably Monday. If the House, as expected, stands by its own version, the issue will go to a committee of members from both chambers who would be charged with finding a compromise.

Other than the extra $38 million for cities, there's not much to choose between the two versions.

The House budget is $11 million higher at $8.08 billion, but that is misleading because it actually calls for $30 million less in spending on government services.

The bottom line is higher only because the House would deposit $41 million more into a state employees' pension fund.

House leaders have said the Senate budget, from what they know about it, cannot pass in the House because many moderate Democrats would regard it as fiscally irresponsible for shortchanging state pension funds.

Although there are a half-dozen or so issues frequently mentioned as conflicts, the one that looms the largest is, technically, not even part of the budget.

And that, in a way, is the problem.

Sen. William A. DiBella, D-Hartford, said House and Senate leaders agreed weeks ago that money for "distressed municipalities" either would be in the budget or would be provided, outside the budget, by slot machines.

"When they sent us a budget," he said, "with zero for distressed municipalities, they made their choice, that they would pass video slots."

Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. has said he would veto the slot-machine bill, so the issue becomes whether the House can muster the 101 votes -- two-thirds of its 151 members -- for an override.

That's almost out of the question, and even a simple majority is a close call, said Assistant Majority Leader Stephen J. Duffy, D-Bristol.

DiBella said the Senate, by amending the budget to finance extra municipal aid from general tax revenues, will present the House a choice: Pass the slot machine bill or accept the Senate budget.

Sen. Frank D. Barrows, D-Hartford, said he's taking the same position because he has a duty to get the most money possible for Hartford.

"All these other legislators are looking after their turf. I'm looking after mine," he said.

A comparison of the two chambers' budgets shows that, in effect, the money for cities would come out of a $62 million pension contribution in the House budget.

That contribution is reduced by $41 million in the Senate budget and, inasmuch as the full contribution was crucial to a House budget compromise, House leaders say the Senate budget is doomed in their chamber.

Barring an abrupt change of course in the next three days -- the session ends at midnight Wednesday -- the legislature is headed for overtime for the second consecutive year.

In 1991, the session was supposed to end in early June, but lasted until Sept. 19. The budget was not adopted until Aug. 22, nearly two months after the budget year began.